News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Italy demands €733M in fines from food delivery platforms by readflaggedcomm on Thursday February 25, 2021 @05:38PM (#26269236)
At what point do hundreds of millions of dollars in operating losses begin to constitute "dumping," where a product (service in this case) is priced below its cost in order to accumulate market share and harm competitors?

Other comments mention that delivery "worked fine" before, which implies DoorDash can't argue that they were perfectly innovative against a "dumping" accusation.

Re:Italy demands €733M in fines from food delivery platforms by nradov on Thursday February 25, 2021 @05:53PM (#26269384)
In legal terms "dumping" is only applicable to imports. There's generally nothing illegal about delivering a local service at a loss, except in limited cases when one company has an effective monopoly and uses that pricing to drive out competitors. For now the food delivery market is still highly competitive.
Re:Italy demands €733M in fines from food delivery platforms by kqvamxurcagg on Thursday February 25, 2021 @06:16PM (#26269601)
I don't think existing competition law or theory applies to this new phenomenon. The delivery companies are essentially selling at a loss to obtain an overwhelming network effect to become a long term monopoly.
Re:Italy demands €733M in fines from food delivery platforms by bagacrap on Friday February 26, 2021 @09:26AM (#26275064)
in this case, Uber eats is importing foreign capital and "dumping" it into the system as subsidies to the consumer which are designed to establish a monopoly. They will either fail to establish a monopoly and close shop, or succeed and jack up prices. Whatever term you want to apply here, this doesn't seem like a business practice that should be permitted.